MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980185632 · doi:10.14778/2350229.2350241

Fundamentals of order dependencies

2012· article· en· W1980185632 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the VLDB Endowment · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFunctional dependencyLexicographical orderAxiomDependency theory (database theory)TupleComputer scienceInferenceDependency (UML)Set (abstract data type)Query optimizationTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsData miningArtificial intelligenceDiscrete mathematicsRelational databaseProgramming languageCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dependencies have played a significant role in database design for many years. They have also been shown to be useful in query optimization. In this paper, we discuss dependencies between lexicographically ordered sets of tuples. We introduce formally the concept of order dependency and present a set of axioms (inference rules) for them. We show how query rewrites based on these axioms can be used for query optimization. We present several interesting theorems that can be derived using the inference rules. We prove that functional dependencies are subsumed by order dependencies and that our set of axioms for order dependencies is sound and complete.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it